The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent our advertisers
Wednesday, May 04, 2011
A Letter To The Editor
Elected Official Doesn't Care what the Constitution Says?
"I don't care what other cities do, or what the Constitution says, because sometimes that's wrong.." Shanie Shields, Salisbury City Councilwoman
Did Ms. Shields not take an oath as an elected official to uphold the U.S. Constitution? Has she read it recently?
People may change and their opinions may differ but our Founding Fathers debated and left behind enough correspondence and documents for us to clearly interpret what they intended for the rule of government in the United States of America. To understand it clearly, you may have to read those other documents and correspondence from the originators but they debated the issues and compromised on some issues, but clearly communicated a free democratic republic for America.
Our current liberal policy makers and judicial system have been twisting its meaning and interpreting the Constitution to further their own agendas. Shame on you, Americans, for allowing an administration to govern, as currently in office, that clearly resembles Marxism! I hope enough of you are concerned as I am for where our country is heading. I also hope enough of you realize the future of a free America is in deep trouble and it will motivate you to vote for serious changes in 2012!
26 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I read her comment in the article in today's Daily Times. I had to read the quote twice to be sure that I had read correctly. Ms. Shields doesn't care what the Constitution says? What does that tell us about her? While most of us knew that she is not the sharpest knife in the drawer, I didn't think that even she would make a remark like that. I applaud the Council majority for coming to a very workable solution regarding the opening prayer.
Campbell rebutted Shields and told her that oath of office came first. I agree with your points about Shields, but caution you not to paint everyone with your broad brush in your 2012 comment and by not mentioning that another official challenged Ms. Shields' absurd disregard for the law.
Shanie Shields was pretty ignorant to say what she said, but this letter to the editor writer is also pretty ignorant. He says the Framers left behind enough correspondence for us to "clearly interpret what they intended." Really? It seems that throughout our history we've had plenty of smart people differ on what the words of the Constitution means.
In fact, the writer of this doesn't seem to have a clue about what the Founders wanted. He claims they wanted a "free democratic republic for America." Really? Has the writer read anything the Founders wrote about democracy? Pretty much every reference they made to democracy was negative. They clearly didn't want a democracy for this country and set up a form of government where one-half of the three branches was democratic (the House of Representatives).
It seems that "liberal policy makers" aren't the only ones twisting the meaning of the Constitution to further their own agendas. The writer of this letter is doing exactly the same thing.
I don't think we should tar and feather her , but , I do think she should resign or a least be fired from her position. We have seen her ignorance in the past , but remember , 1 bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. Just keep eating your candy and keep your mouth shut.
If Shields does not care what the Constitution says, she needs to resign. Right now. She took an oath to uphold the Constitution. No one can do that who declares they don't care what it says.
I agree. Democracy was a bad word to the Founding Fathers. It destroyed many great nations before us and is destroying us now. We are supposed to be a constitutional republic with, as you mentioned, a small portion of our government as a representative democracy.
Constitutions shouldn't be held in sanctimonious reverence but should be left open to amendment to address the ever changing needs of an evolving nation. (Jefferson)
Remember, the Constitution once said that it was ok to have slaves, that only property holders could vote and of course women couldn't vote. While these portions of the Constitution sounded good in theory to the white, property owning, all male framers of the Constitution, succeeding generations said, "I don't care what the Constitution says, this is unfair and needs to be amended."
That said, the electorate needs to determine if their representative has some legitimate point of contention with the Constitution or is just some attention hungry demagogue trying to gain unjust changes for their side of an issue. The Constitutional amendment process insures that legitimate concerns about the Constitution may be addressed and that partisan demagogues can be dismissed as such!
I'm really frustrated with the liberals and progressives who repeatedly ignore or dismiss the Constitution because they believe it's outdated or irrelevant. If you don't like the Constitution, there is a way to amend it. It wasn't perfect when it was written and the authors built a means to change it. Yes, it did benefit white, male, landowners and was later changed through proper means. Saying that the authors were racist and using that as a reason to discredit the entire document is dumb, at best.
If a system doesn't work, we modify the system or create a new one. But, the rules of any system must be clearly defined to have order.
The Daily Times removed this thread from the online edition ROFLMBO I think the Cat's already out of the bag, the barn door was left open and all that good stuff. hehehee
On record saying "I don't care what other cities do, or what the Constitution says, because sometimes that's wrong.." Shanie Shields
A broken vow of her swearing in, definately not to be forgotten if she ever tries to run again!
If you want to talk to shanie , go to McDonalds on Nanticoke road in the morning , she will be there with her ignorant friends telling ignorant stories and praising obamie.
2:53, now why would I want to waste a perfectly good morning to go to McDonals and watch Shanie eat a couple of Big Macs and wax eloquently on the affairs of the day. Seeing and hearing her on Pac-14 is more than enough!
I just shook my head when I read the article in the paper. My hat is tipped to Terry Cohen for her professionalism in handling the issue and the utter idiotic mutterings that come out of Shanie Shields.
26 comments:
I read her comment in the article in today's Daily Times. I had to read the quote twice to be sure that I had read correctly. Ms. Shields doesn't care what the Constitution says? What does that tell us about her? While most of us knew that she is not the sharpest knife in the drawer, I didn't think that even she would make a remark like that. I applaud the Council majority for coming to a very workable solution regarding the opening prayer.
Campbell rebutted Shields and told her that oath of office came first. I agree with your points about Shields, but caution you not to paint everyone with your broad brush in your 2012 comment and by not mentioning that another official challenged Ms. Shields' absurd disregard for the law.
What do you expect, she is one step away from President of Black Panthers...
An "OBAMA-NIGHT" the New World Order who takes direction form the UNITED NATIONS and not our Constitution.
Good article Joe...
Shanie Shields was pretty ignorant to say what she said, but this letter to the editor writer is also pretty ignorant. He says the Framers left behind enough correspondence for us to "clearly interpret what they intended." Really? It seems that throughout our history we've had plenty of smart people differ on what the words of the Constitution means.
In fact, the writer of this doesn't seem to have a clue about what the Founders wanted. He claims they wanted a "free democratic republic for America." Really? Has the writer read anything the Founders wrote about democracy? Pretty much every reference they made to democracy was negative. They clearly didn't want a democracy for this country and set up a form of government where one-half of the three branches was democratic (the House of Representatives).
It seems that "liberal policy makers" aren't the only ones twisting the meaning of the Constitution to further their own agendas. The writer of this letter is doing exactly the same thing.
Blame the people that voted for her TWICE!
I don't think we should tar and feather her , but , I do think she should resign or a least be fired from her position.
We have seen her ignorance in the past , but remember , 1 bad apple can spoil the whole bunch.
Just keep eating your candy and keep your mouth shut.
If Shields does not care what the Constitution says, she needs to resign. Right now. She took an oath to uphold the Constitution. No one can do that who declares they don't care what it says.
11:07
I agree. Democracy was a bad word to the Founding Fathers. It destroyed many great nations before us and is destroying us now. We are supposed to be a constitutional republic with, as you mentioned, a small portion of our government as a representative democracy.
Constitutions shouldn't be held in sanctimonious reverence but should be left open to amendment to address the ever changing needs of an evolving nation. (Jefferson)
Remember, the Constitution once said that it was ok to have slaves, that only property holders could vote and of course women couldn't vote. While these portions of the Constitution sounded good in theory to the white, property owning, all male framers of the Constitution, succeeding generations said, "I don't care what the Constitution says, this is unfair and needs to be amended."
That said, the electorate needs to determine if their representative has some legitimate point of contention with the Constitution or is just some attention hungry demagogue trying to gain unjust changes for their side of an issue. The Constitutional amendment process insures that legitimate concerns about the Constitution may be addressed and that partisan demagogues can be dismissed as such!
That's our Shanie, pour some salt on her and watch her shrivel up like a slug.
I'm really frustrated with the liberals and progressives who repeatedly ignore or dismiss the Constitution because they believe it's outdated or irrelevant. If you don't like the Constitution, there is a way to amend it. It wasn't perfect when it was written and the authors built a means to change it. Yes, it did benefit white, male, landowners and was later changed through proper means.
Saying that the authors were racist and using that as a reason to discredit the entire document is dumb, at best.
If a system doesn't work, we modify the system or create a new one. But, the rules of any system must be clearly defined to have order.
11:25
Your last sentence is an impossibility.
Shanie read? No way.
Joe:
How about doing an online petition that asks Shameless Shanie to resign ASAP.
I'll bet Obama is her source of guidance on the Constitution, since he once taught about it.
The Daily Times removed this thread from the online edition ROFLMBO I think the Cat's already out of the bag, the barn door was left open and all that good stuff. hehehee
On record saying "I don't care what other cities do, or what the Constitution says, because sometimes that's wrong.." Shanie Shields
A broken vow of her swearing in, definately not to be forgotten if she ever tries to run again!
If you want to talk to shanie , go to McDonalds on Nanticoke road in the morning , she will be there with her ignorant friends telling ignorant stories and praising obamie.
2:53, now why would I want to waste a perfectly good morning to go to McDonals and watch Shanie eat a couple of Big Macs and wax eloquently on the affairs of the day. Seeing and hearing her on Pac-14 is more than enough!
This isn't a big deal. At least for me. I can honestly say that Shanie's comments don't lower my opinion of her one bit.
She must be an Obama type of Democrat.
Shields' attitude borders on treason and she ought to be removed from office.
I cringe whenever Shields speaks at a Council meeting. She is never on point.
The Constitution means NOTHING to lawmakers today!!!!! They continually make laws that are against The Constitution!!!!!
When you call them on it they just say no no that is not a law it is a civil regulation or its a guideline or some BS like that.
We all had better pay attention or we will have ABSOLUTLY NO RIGHTS at ALL!!!!!
I just shook my head when I read the article in the paper. My hat is tipped to Terry Cohen for her professionalism in handling the issue and the utter idiotic mutterings that come out of Shanie Shields.
Why should anyone care, look at Salisbury, it's going, going and almost gone! She's just helping it go a little faster.
Post a Comment